March 3rd, 2002, 9:48 pm
Do you mean a person without passig some of SOA exams still can work in an insurance company ? >>No, that's not what I meant. Exams are the coin of the realm for beggining to mid-level actuaries. You might be able to get an actuarial position in an insurance company without any exams, but you generally WILL be able to get an actuarial position if you have an exam under your belt (...and your head doesn't spin around 360 degrees or anything like that). Apparently insurance companies, as opposed to consulting firms, make it actuarial students' job to pass exams and nothing else.On Street, if a firm usually plans to hire a quant. analyst, do those whose background is acturial science have more advantages than physists or probabilists ? >>I would guess that the opposite is more nearly true -- a firm looking for a quant will want a PhD in stats or physics or math rather than an actuary. Actuaries can make almost as much money in traditional actuarial fields (PhDs can't), and actuaries come out of a much less inquisitive educational system.Could you tell me about what career path and chances of a people studying acturial science are in usual ? >>Insurance and human resource consulting.If a person wants to be a actuary, what qualification should he have ? >>Good at taking standardized tests, logical, detail oriented.Does work of a actuary have more challenge and fun than a quant analyst from your personal experience and observation ? >>I've never worked as a quant, but I would be surprised if it were not more challenging and fun than being an actuary. This is not to say that actuarial work is all boring, but the main part of it pretty much is; the main territory of actuarial practice is thoroughly mapped out.